Relocating Self-Translation from the Interlingual to Intralingual: Faulkner as a Self-Translauthor

Öz

American author William Faulkner (1897-1962) rewrites his book Sanctuary (1931) as the editor turns down the first manuscript claiming that they both would be jailed if it is published. In the source literary system, the discussion about the rewriting is confined to two reasons: the issue of morality and the artistic flaws in the original text. The point of departure in the present article, which aims to explore this rewriting process within the context of translation studies, is André Lefevere’s definition. Lefevere states that “every translation is a rewriting” (1992, vii). Considering this widely-accepted definition, this paper pursues an answer to the following questions: Is it (im)possible to call a ‘rewriting’ a translation? And if the ‘rewriting’ is within the same language, can we call it an ‘intralingual translation?’ As Faulkner rewrites his own text himself, could this be a ‘self-translation’ as well?. ‘Self-translation’ is defined with reference to a bilingual writer who writes his own text in another language. If bilingualism is imperative for ‘self-translation’, then, is it (im)possible to call it a ‘self-translation’ when a writer rewrites his own text in the same language? The question whether the analyzed case can be regarded as an ‘intralingual self-translation’ will be examined according to Gideon Toury’s translation norms. A comparative textual analysis of the original text and the revised text will be carried out to display the findings that will be discussed in the framework of Toury’s method for descriptive translation studies.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• intralingual translation,self-translation,rewriting,translation norms,translauthor

Kaynakça

1. Beer, Ann. 1994. “Beckett’s Bilingualism.” In The Cambridge Companion to Beckett, edited by John Pilling, 209-221. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
2. Berk Albachten, Özlem. 2014. “Intralingual Translation: Discussions within Translation Studies and the Case of Turkey.” In A Companion to Translation Studies, edited by Sandra Bermann and Catherine Porter, 573-585. West Sussex: Wiley-Blackwell.
3. Berk Albachten, Özlem. 2015. “The Turkish Language Reform and Intralingual Translation.” In Tradition, Tension and Translation in Turkey, edited by Şehnaz Tahir Gürçağlar, Saliha Paker and John Milton, 165-180. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
4. Berk Albachten, Özlem. 2019. “Challenging the Boundaries of Translation and Filling the Gaps in Translation History: Two Cases of Intralingual Translation from the 19th-century Ottoman Literary Scene.” Chap. 10 in Moving Boundaries in Translation Studies, edited by Helle V. Dam, Matilde Nisbeth Brøgger, Karen Korning Zethsen. London: Routledge. Google Book.
5. Birkan Baydan, Esra. 2011. “Editing as Rewriting.” Istanbul University Journal of Translation Studies 3: 53-78. http://dergipark.gov.tr/download/article-file/13474.
6. Çulhaoğlu, Tahsin. 2017. “A Portrait of The Translauthor in Don Quixote.” Adıyaman Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi 9 (25): 1-19. http://dergipark.ulakbim.gov.tr/adyusbd/article/view/5000192370/5000181518.
7. Derrida, Jacques. 1985. “Des Tours de Babel.” In Difference in Translation, edited by Joseph F. Graham, 165-207. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
8. Drowne, Kathleen Morgan. 2000. “Spirits of Defiance: The Influence of National Prohibition on American Literature, 1920-1933.” PhD diss., University of North Carolina.

9. Ehrlich, Shlomit. 2009. “Are Self-Translators Like Other Translators?.” Perspectives: Studies in Translatology 17 (4): 243-255. doi:10.1080/09076760903404050.
10. Ersland, Anlaug. 2014. “Is Change Necessary? A Study of Norms and Translation Universals in Intralingual Translation.” MA thesis, University of Bergen.
11. Faulkner, William. 1931. Sanctuary. New York: Random House.
12. Faulkner, William. 1981. Sanctuary: The Original Text, edited by Noel Polk. New York: Random House.
13. Fowler, Doreen. 2004. “Faulkner’s Return to the Freudian Father: Sanctuary Reconsidered.” Modern Fiction Studies 50 (2): 411-34.
14. Gottlieb, Henrik. 2005. “Multidimensional Translation: Semantics Turned Semiotics.” In Proceedings of the Marie Curie EuroConferences MuTra: Challenges of Multidimensional Translation, edited by Heidrun Gerzymisch-Arbogast and Sandra Nauert, 1-29. Saarbrücken: MuTra https://www.euroconferences.info/proceedings/2005_Proceedings/2005_Gottlieb_Henrik.pdf.
15. Grutman, Rainier. 2009. “Self-Translation.” In Routledge Encyclopedia of Translation Studies, edited by Mona Baker and Gabriela Saldanha, 257-259. New York: Routledge.
16. Hermans, Theo. 1997. “Translation as Institution.” In Translation as Intercultural Communication: Selected Papers from the EST Congress, Prague 1995 , edited by Mary Snell-Hornby, Zuzana Jettmarovâ and Klaus Kaindl, 3-20. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
17. Hokenson, Jan Walsh and Marcella Munson. 2007. The Bilingual Text. History and Theory of Literary Self-Translation. Manchester: St. Jerome.
18. Jaillant, Lise. 2016. Modernism, Middlebrow and the Literary Canon: The Modern Library Series, 1917-1955. London: Routledge.
19. Jakobson, Roman. 1959. “On Linguistics Aspects of Translation.” In On Translation, edited by R. A. Drawer, 232-239. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
20. Karadağ, Ayşe Banu. 2010a. “Çevirmen ve Düzeltmen/Yayın Yönetmeni Dipnotlarıyla Osmanlı Tarihi’ni Yeniden Yazmak: Diliçi ve Dillerarası Çeviri Örneği.” [To rewrite the Ottoman History with the footnotes of translator and redactor/chief editor: Sample of intralingual and interlingual translation.] In I. International Translation Studies and Terminology Conference Proceedings, edited by İlhami Sığırcı, Ayhan Güneş and Ziya Tok, 235-245. Kırıkkale: Vizyon Ofset.
21. Karadağ, Ayşe Banu. 2010b. “Görsel Dilde Çeviri Olgusuna Farklı Yaklaşımlar: Tercüman-ı Eşkâl.” [Different approaches to translation in visual language: Tercüman-ı Eşkâl.] In The Tenth Language, Literature and Stylistics Symposium Proceedings, edited by Suna Ağıldere and Nurettin Ceviz, 688-694. Ankara: Bizim Büro.
22. Karadağ, Ayşe Banu. 2011a. “Okur-Yazar/Çizer Çevirmen I.” [Reader-writer/cartoonist translator I.] Çeviribilim Dergisi. 3:5.
23. Karadağ, Ayşe Banu. 2011b. “Okur-Yazar/Çizer Çevirmen II.” [Reader-writer/cartoonist translator II.] Çeviribilim Dergisi. 4:9.
24. Karas, Hilla. 2016. “Intralingual Intertemporal Translation as a Relevant Category in Translation Studies.” Target 28 (3): 445-466. doi:10.1075/target.28.3.05kar.
25. Lefevere, André. 1992. Translation, Rewriting and the Manipulation of Literary Fame. London: Routledge.
26. Levey, David. 1996. “Samuel Beckett and the Silent Art of Self-Translation.” BIBLID 3 (4): 53-61.
27. Montini, Chiara. 2010. “Self-Translation.” In Handbook of Translation Studies Volume 1, edited by Yves Gambier and Luc van Doorslaer, 306-308. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
28. Phillips, Gene D. 1988. Fiction, Film and Faulkner: The Art of Adaptation. Knoxville: The University of Tennessee Press.
29. Shread, Carolyn. 2009. “Redefining Translation through Self-Translation: The Case of Nancy Houston.” Translation in French Francophone Literature and Film, French Literature Series 26:51-66.
30. Sindicic- Sabljo, Mirna. 2011. “Beckett’s Bilingualism, Self-Translation and the Translation of His Texts into the Croatian Language.” JoLIE 4:163-180.
31. Sturrock, John. 1991. “On Jakobson on Translation.” In Recent Developments in Theory and History: The Semiotic Web, edited by Thomas A. Sebeok and Jean Umiker- Sebeok, 307-321. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.
32. Toury, Gideon. 1986. “Translation: A Cultural-Semiotic Perspective.” In Encyclopedic Dictionary of Semiotics, edited by Thomas A. Sebeok, 1111-1124. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
33. Toury, Gideon. 1995a. Descriptive Translation Studies and Beyond. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
34. Toury, Gideon. 1995b. “The Notion of ‘Assumed Translation’: An Invitation to a New Discussion.” In Letterlijkheid, Woordelijheid / Literality, Verbality, edited by H. Bloemen, E. Hertog and W. Segers, 135-147. Antwerp: Fantom.
35. Zethsen, Karen Koning. 2009. “Intralingual Translation: An Attempt at Description”. Meta: Translators’ Journal 54 (4): 795-812.